Can we talk necks and frets ?
Discussion
I know its probably a largely personal thing, but Im interested to know the thinking behind the vast range of neck and fret shapes.
Whats the reasoning behind some of them, why are apparently older necks fatter than modern?
Whats the difference in playabilty between tiny frets and steel girder sized ones ?
Whats your own prefernce and why ?
Idle musings from a passionate noob....
Whats the reasoning behind some of them, why are apparently older necks fatter than modern?
Whats the difference in playabilty between tiny frets and steel girder sized ones ?
Whats your own prefernce and why ?
Idle musings from a passionate noob....
Fret width doesn't make a great deal of difference, but higher frets can make it easier to bend strings as there is a greater length of string for the finger to make contact with, the same thing could be said of chord playing. I used to use mostly the Dunlop 6100 which was very popular with all that tried it. I believe that Ibanez use/d it, or something very similar at least, on their JEM series guitars.
As for neck profile, not being a player myself I have no opinion to offer, but I believe it to be a matter of personal preference anyway.
As for neck profile, not being a player myself I have no opinion to offer, but I believe it to be a matter of personal preference anyway.
singlecoil said:
Fret width doesn't make a great deal of difference, but higher frets can make it easier to bend strings as there is a greater length of string for the finger to make contact with, the same thing could be said of chord playing. I used to use mostly the Dunlop 6100 which was very popular with all that tried it. I believe that Ibanez use/d it, or something very similar at least, on their JEM series guitars.
As for neck profile, not being a player myself I have no opinion to offer, but I believe it to be a matter of personal preference anyway.
People do refer to "fast" neck profiles as those that are very thin and quite wide, but as a total hack I haven't noticed much difference. As for neck profile, not being a player myself I have no opinion to offer, but I believe it to be a matter of personal preference anyway.
My personal preference is for a chunky neck so that it fills the thenar space between thumb and forefinger. That means less work to keep the correct hand shape; my '73 SG feels roughly like a baseball bat that's been sawn in half, which is just about right for me.
I would hazard a guess that most players' preference revolves around their first guitar, which is very often a not very good one. They have to learn some questionable habits to work around the issues on that guitar, and as a result build up muscle memory based around that guitar. I'm looking at the really cheap first acoustic I had 17 years ago right now, and as it happens that has a very chunky neck too.
So I think the best advice is to not worry about this stuff yet as you aren't good enough at the moment to notice. Get a guitar you like, learn to play it, and then figure out what sort of necks you prefer.
Turn7 said:
I know its probably a largely personal thing, but Im interested to know the thinking behind the vast range of neck and fret shapes.
Whats the reasoning behind some of them, why are apparently older necks fatter than modern?
Whats the difference in playabilty between tiny frets and steel girder sized ones ?
Whats your own prefernce and why ?
Idle musings from a passionate noob....
The older fatter necks come from times when technology wasn't so advanced, and the thinking was that a big 'ole fat piece of maple was the best thing for stability. Obviously, times have changed, with the 80's revolution leading the way on that front. Better use of laminates, better neck joints, better construction techniques etc etc have led to thinner necks. Some people prefer clubby old necks, and there will always be a portion of the guitar market that caters for the nostalgia crowd, hence why clubby necks haven't went away completely. Whats the reasoning behind some of them, why are apparently older necks fatter than modern?
Whats the difference in playabilty between tiny frets and steel girder sized ones ?
Whats your own prefernce and why ?
Idle musings from a passionate noob....
The difference between small frets and big frets is a subtle one you probably won't appreciate straight away. Big frets give the guitar a more responsive 'touch'. Hard to describe, but try just playing something entirely with your left hand. On jumbo frets, you'll be able to get the notes to 'pop' out, less so with mandolin wire! I find bends and deep vibrato easier with jumbo frets.
My preference? I have usually preferred fast, oiled necks as opposed to any solid finish. That said, I've always loved the Jackson shape and my Jackson soloist has a thin, fast neck. It's finished on the back, but the finish is so clean and glassy it doesn't get tacky on the hand. Take something like a Gibson and you'll notice that tackiness that can develop on a roughly finished neck. I also quite like flat fretboards too. Ibanez and Jackson are probably my top choices, because they led the charge of technological advancement in the 80's by giving guitar technology the update it severely needed.
Interesting post Baronyx, thanks.
Ive started learning half barre chords currently, and am struggling to play them without it *really* hurting the muscles insie my hand. I cant play these without pain unless my thumb is halfawy round the back of the neck.
I was wondering if the thickness and radius (7.25") of my current guitar was the issue - ie flatter and maybe thicker neck would fill my hand better.
Ive started learning half barre chords currently, and am struggling to play them without it *really* hurting the muscles insie my hand. I cant play these without pain unless my thumb is halfawy round the back of the neck.
I was wondering if the thickness and radius (7.25") of my current guitar was the issue - ie flatter and maybe thicker neck would fill my hand better.
The more of that you do, the easier it will get. However, 20 years in & certain rhythm parts that are barre chord heavy will still get me shaking my hand back to life whenever the song allows. A good part of it is realising that as your technique develops, you play more accurately & you don't need to compensate so much with excessive pressure. It really doesn't need the weight of a ten ton press to form a barre chord.
You're probably only going to find a limited degree of relief chasing down neck profiles & fret heights, achy hands are just part of the deal really.
You're probably only going to find a limited degree of relief chasing down neck profiles & fret heights, achy hands are just part of the deal really.
If it's a Telecaster then it should have a reasonable thickness of neck already. Usually flatter necks are also somewhat thinner (front to back) too.
Sounds like the main issue might be the frets, Teles and Strat always use to have medium height frets and you might find playing easier with something a little higher. If you can get to a music shop you might try an Ibanez with higher frets, though the neck will be thinner. You could even get the Tele refretted, might be worth doing if it's not a valuable one and you like the sound otherwise.
I can't see that the radius would be an issue, usually easier to barre the greater the curvature (smaller the radius).
Sounds like the main issue might be the frets, Teles and Strat always use to have medium height frets and you might find playing easier with something a little higher. If you can get to a music shop you might try an Ibanez with higher frets, though the neck will be thinner. You could even get the Tele refretted, might be worth doing if it's not a valuable one and you like the sound otherwise.
I can't see that the radius would be an issue, usually easier to barre the greater the curvature (smaller the radius).
Turn7 said:
Interesting post Baronyx, thanks.
Ive started learning half barre chords currently, and am struggling to play them without it *really* hurting the muscles insie my hand. I cant play these without pain unless my thumb is halfawy round the back of the neck.
I was wondering if the thickness and radius (7.25") of my current guitar was the issue - ie flatter and maybe thicker neck would fill my hand better.
The issue is probably your technique, once you can play a barre chord properly you'll be able to do it on any guitar. The thinner necks developed as a result of the drive towards better ergonomics in the 80s do have benefits in reducing muscular fatigue but this is more noticeable in lead playing than chordal stuff. However, if your technique is poor, you won't get the benefit of the thinner necks and flatter fretboards as you will always be your own limiting factor.Ive started learning half barre chords currently, and am struggling to play them without it *really* hurting the muscles insie my hand. I cant play these without pain unless my thumb is halfawy round the back of the neck.
I was wondering if the thickness and radius (7.25") of my current guitar was the issue - ie flatter and maybe thicker neck would fill my hand better.
You should have a look at your hand when you are playing these chords that are hurting you, your thumb should be on the back of the neck, ideally pointing parallel to the strings. If your thumb is creeping up around the neck and poking out behind the low E string you'll be "crabbing" your hand up and this will make you cramp in no time. Keep your thumb and the ball of your hand loose and relaxed, too much tension in this part of your hand forces your finger tendons to work harder, resulting in fatigue and possible injury. You fingers should be coming in parallel to the strings, not coming in diagonally - if they are coming in diagonally, that is another sign of crabbing.
Mastodon - my thumbs going the other way - heading towards the high E. If I try to play with my thumb over the top of the board as my tutor suggests, my first finger arcs and loses contact with the high E.
The issue is onyl with HALF barres as I can play full barres with no issue.
I agree its a case of practising technique, but this is the first thing that is really getting to me. My hand just doesnt seem to be able to make the required shapes without adding silly pressure to the board.
The issue is onyl with HALF barres as I can play full barres with no issue.
I agree its a case of practising technique, but this is the first thing that is really getting to me. My hand just doesnt seem to be able to make the required shapes without adding silly pressure to the board.
Turn7 said:
Mastodon - my thumbs going the other way - heading towards the high E. If I try to play with my thumb over the top of the board as my tutor suggests, my first finger arcs and loses contact with the high E.
The issue is onyl with HALF barres as I can play full barres with no issue.
I agree its a case of practising technique, but this is the first thing that is really getting to me. My hand just doesnt seem to be able to make the required shapes without adding silly pressure to the board.
It will. It really is a case of plugging away until you develop the technique. It's a bit like driving a car - you can't do it, then you can do it, then you wonder how it was that you couldn't do it. It'll come with time.The issue is onyl with HALF barres as I can play full barres with no issue.
I agree its a case of practising technique, but this is the first thing that is really getting to me. My hand just doesnt seem to be able to make the required shapes without adding silly pressure to the board.
Shouldn't the thumb be perpendicular to the strings!? It's the classical way! 
Generally I found I cramp up with thinner necks. The 'Soft-V' fender necks are one of my favourites although I don't have a guitar yet with that profile. My LP has the thickest neck I've played (would describe it as a 'D' shape) and I'm finding it very comfortable to play as I feel it fills my hand 'arc' better and therefore better support. My tele neck is thinner and I find it 'faster' due to flatter radius and thinner profile at the back but I do tend to cramp up sometimes playing extended sets with lots of barre chords.
I get most of it is just good technique and electric players generally don't play it the 'correct' way. I'm gulity of it with a few bad habits.
Generally I found I cramp up with thinner necks. The 'Soft-V' fender necks are one of my favourites although I don't have a guitar yet with that profile. My LP has the thickest neck I've played (would describe it as a 'D' shape) and I'm finding it very comfortable to play as I feel it fills my hand 'arc' better and therefore better support. My tele neck is thinner and I find it 'faster' due to flatter radius and thinner profile at the back but I do tend to cramp up sometimes playing extended sets with lots of barre chords.
I get most of it is just good technique and electric players generally don't play it the 'correct' way. I'm gulity of it with a few bad habits.
Turn7 said:
Mastodon - my thumbs going the other way - heading towards the high E. If I try to play with my thumb over the top of the board as my tutor suggests, my first finger arcs and loses contact with the high E.
The issue is onyl with HALF barres as I can play full barres with no issue.
I agree its a case of practising technique, but this is the first thing that is really getting to me. My hand just doesnt seem to be able to make the required shapes without adding silly pressure to the board.
Your thumb should not be heading towards the high E or you will be making a very strange and likely tense shape with your hand. Thumb parallel to the strings works best for me when moving from one barre chord to another, or thumb towards the low E for certain shapes. Thumb never over the neck, if it's peeping out near the low E you either have massive hands, a tiny guitar neck or bad technique.The issue is onyl with HALF barres as I can play full barres with no issue.
I agree its a case of practising technique, but this is the first thing that is really getting to me. My hand just doesnt seem to be able to make the required shapes without adding silly pressure to the board.
It really is just about getting the strength down. It's a funny thing, guitar hand strength; when you first start you will want to crush the strings through the board, and you'll damn near need to to get the notes out clean. Once you start to innately unconsciously improve the way your finger tips contact the strings you'll start getting notes out cleanly without trying, chords will become a lot easier. Your hands will be much stronger and have way more stamina than when you started, but you will realise you don't have to press anywhere near as hard as you thought you did (providing your guitar is set up correctly).
Before playing guitar, the muscles in your hands will have not developed in any sort of fashion, unless you've previously played another instrument, which I'm guessing you have not. You can't easily consciously improve things like how your fingers contact the strings, or not pressing too hard while playing. The only thing to do is sit with a guitar in your hands and play, play and play. Now get playing!
Mastodon2 said:
your finger tips contact the strings
This is also important, as important as making sure your thumb isn't creeping over the edge of the neck when you are playing. Some people fret with the pads of their fingers, but you're much better off fretting the note with the tip (the point). Not only will you get a cleaner, more controllable contact with the string, you'll also encourage your hand into proper technique, with your thumb pointing towards the headstock. If you fret with the pads of your fingers, try consciously fretting with the tip and marvel at how much more control you have.
Gassing Station | Music | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff